[002]
Wyldchyld
Current Version
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"The audience is stating that, with no other information provided about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance, it leaves the work with Unfortunate Implications ...\\\"
\\\"The entire point of Unfortunate Implications is that they are implications — it is a conclusion drawn by the information that the story has provided, absent of any other context which would reduce whatever makes it \\\"unfortunate\\\".\\\"
I think all I\\\'ll say here is that you\\\'ve misunderstood what I said. The fans made a guess based on a creator comment, not the work itself. The unfortunate implication came from the guess, not the work. An unfortunate implication would be this: \\\"Because Ironwood\\\'s Semblance is making him do X, this generates Y unfortunate implications\\\". What is instead happening is this: \\\"If you interpret the creator\\\'s comment in X way, you can come up with Y unfortunate implication\\\".
\\\"Actually, you\\\'ve provided yet ANOTHER example of inconsistency, since at first, they DID say that his Semblance was what allowed him to do so, only to backtrack on that later. That is actually acknowledged within the very video. \\\"
I\\\'ve seen the panel and the conversation the creators had about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance. Creator 1 tried to explain how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance worked and decided they needed an example to help explain it. They used Ironwood pulling his arm free as the example of what the Semblance can enable a person to achieve. Creator 2 jumped in to clarify Ironwood didn\\\'t use the Semblance in the scene because his Aura was broken. Creator 1 acknowledged that, saying they were using the scene to try and describe how the Semblance would work when active.
They were having trouble putting into words how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance works. Everything the fandom is doing is just guessing.
Edited to add: I didn\\\'t see all those extra posts, until after I\\\'d posted this. So, apologies; the discussion had moved on by the time I posted this. [=@Rebel=] I\\\'m aware of the [=Q&A=] you\\\'re referring to; I think Qrow is probably best discussed on the forum at this point.
\\\"The entire point of Unfortunate Implications is that they are implications — it is a conclusion drawn by the information that the story has provided, absent of any other context which would reduce whatever makes it \\\"unfortunate\\\".\\\"
I think all I\\\'ll say here is that you\\\'ve misunderstood what I said. The fans made a guess based on a creator comment, not the work itself. The unfortunate implication came from the guess, not the work. An unfortunate implication would be this: \\\"Because Ironwood\\\'s Semblance is making him do X, this generates Y unfortunate implications\\\". What is instead happening is this: \\\"If you interpret the creator\\\'s comment in X way, you can come up with Y unfortunate implication\\\".
\\\"Actually, you\\\'ve provided yet ANOTHER example of inconsistency, since at first, they DID say that his Semblance was what allowed him to do so, only to backtrack on that later. That is actually acknowledged within the very video. \\\"
I\\\'ve seen the panel and the conversation the creators had about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance. Creator 1 tried to explain how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance worked and decided they needed an example to help explain it. They used Ironwood pulling his arm free as the example of what the Semblance can enable a person to achieve. Creator 2 jumped in to clarify Ironwood didn\\\'t use the Semblance in the scene because his Aura was broken. Creator 1 acknowledged that, saying they were using the scene to try and describe how the Semblance would work when active.
They were having trouble putting into words how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance works. Everything the fandom is doing is just guessing.
Edited to add: I didn\\\'t see all those extra posts, until after I\\\'d posted this. So, apologies; the discussion had moved on by the time I posted this. [=@Rebel=] I\\\'m aware of the [=Q&A=] you\\\'re referring to; I think Qrow is probably best discussed on the forum at this point.
Changed line(s) 3 from:
n
\
to:
\\\"The audience is stating that, with no other information provided about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance, it leaves the work with Unfortunate Implications ...\\\"
\\\"The entire point of Unfortunate Implications is that they are implications — it is a conclusion drawn by the information that the story has provided, absent of any other context which would reduce whatever makes it \\\"unfortunate\\\".\\\"
I think all I\\\'ll say here is that you\\\'ve misunderstood what I said. The fans made a guess based on a creator comment, not the work itself. The unfortunate implication came from the guess, not the work. An unfortunate implication would be this: \\\"Because Ironwood\\\'s Semblance is making him do X, this generates Y unfortunate implications\\\". What is instead happening is this: \\\"If you interpret the creator\\\'s comment in X way, you can come up with Y unfortunate implication\\\".
\\\"Actually, you\\\'ve provided yet ANOTHER example of inconsistency, since at first, they DID say that his Semblance was what allowed him to do so, only to backtrack on that later. That is actually acknowledged within the very video. \\\"
I\\\'ve seen the panel and the conversation the creators had about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance. Creator 1 tried to explain how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance worked and decided they needed an example to help explain it. They used Ironwood pulling his arm free as the example of what the Semblance can enable a person to achieve. Creator 2 jumped in to clarify Ironwood didn\\\'t use the Semblance in the scene because his Aura was broken. Creator 1 acknowledged that, saying they were using the scene to try and describe how the Semblance would work when active.
They were having trouble putting into words how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance works. Everything the fandom is doing is just guessing.
Edited to add: I didn\\\'t see all those extra posts, until after I\\\'d posted this. So, apologies; the discussion had moved on by the time I posted this.
\\\"The entire point of Unfortunate Implications is that they are implications — it is a conclusion drawn by the information that the story has provided, absent of any other context which would reduce whatever makes it \\\"unfortunate\\\".\\\"
I think all I\\\'ll say here is that you\\\'ve misunderstood what I said. The fans made a guess based on a creator comment, not the work itself. The unfortunate implication came from the guess, not the work. An unfortunate implication would be this: \\\"Because Ironwood\\\'s Semblance is making him do X, this generates Y unfortunate implications\\\". What is instead happening is this: \\\"If you interpret the creator\\\'s comment in X way, you can come up with Y unfortunate implication\\\".
\\\"Actually, you\\\'ve provided yet ANOTHER example of inconsistency, since at first, they DID say that his Semblance was what allowed him to do so, only to backtrack on that later. That is actually acknowledged within the very video. \\\"
I\\\'ve seen the panel and the conversation the creators had about Ironwood\\\'s Semblance. Creator 1 tried to explain how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance worked and decided they needed an example to help explain it. They used Ironwood pulling his arm free as the example of what the Semblance can enable a person to achieve. Creator 2 jumped in to clarify Ironwood didn\\\'t use the Semblance in the scene because his Aura was broken. Creator 1 acknowledged that, saying they were using the scene to try and describe how the Semblance would work when active.
They were having trouble putting into words how Ironwood\\\'s Semblance works. Everything the fandom is doing is just guessing.
Edited to add: I didn\\\'t see all those extra posts, until after I\\\'d posted this. So, apologies; the discussion had moved on by the time I posted this.
